Author ORCID Identifier
Theft rhetoric, Compulsory licenses, Public health, Profits, Patent rights, Pharmaceutical companies, Judeo-Christian moral law, Drug development
This Article contemplates the validity of theft rhetoric in relation to the right of countries to grant compulsory licenses from an unconventional perspective; that of biblical teachings on what it means to steal.
Part I describes the use of theft rhetoric in relation to IP infringement broadly and drug-patent compulsory licenses in particular.
Part II challenges the contention, suggested by theft rhetoric, that compulsory licenses are morally wrong as a form of stealing, by considering the meaning of theft in the context of its Judeo-Christian origins.
Part III considers the cogency of the accusation that the issuance of compulsory licenses in developing countries destroys pharmaceutical-company innovation incentives.
Part IV concludes that expanding, as the Bible does, the definition of theft to include the possibility that a property owner may be stealing from the poor, can help us to properly evaluate the morality of drug-patent compulsory licenses.
Minnesota Law Review
Margo A. Bagley, The Morality of Compulsory Licensing as an Access to Medicines Tool, 102 MINN. L. REV. 2463 (2018).
Health Law and Policy Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Other Public Health Commons, Pharmaceutics and Drug Design Commons, Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons, Social Welfare Commons